Even bigger map?!

I love this much larger map that you guys have made (for one thing it doesn't make the Seleucids into a joke) and I know there's only 200 provinces allowed, but does anyone know of a way to maybe up the number of provinces without wrecking the game and with that in place maybe a way that the map could be extended all the way to China and maybe the majority of the Indian Subcontinent? :D I guess maybe one that follows this map? http://www.antiquemaps4u.com/images/maps/1844_World.jpg Except with a wee bit more of China. It would be nice to conquer the majority of the Old World, if you had enough time to. :3

FYI I do know next to nothing about modding this game, so please go easy on me in your replies. :embarassed:

The province limit is hardcoded, meaning it cannot changed by anyone except the company that made the game (CA) and their not about to do anything like that, people have tried to convince them in the past with no sucess.

Also consider how long it would take to research and make all the extra factions that such a map would require, it took around four years for EB 1 to reach its final state the map your suggesting would be doubling or even tripling the number of factions, not to mention the need for more hardcoded limits to be removed (such as the unit and faction limits).
Sadly such a map is not possible unless CA come up with a new game that doesn't have these hardcoded limits.:no:

Man that's lame. :/

Meh, you could just take the lazy approach and just put in the warring Chinese states and the Mauryans (maybe the Xiong-nu as well) and just make all the rest rebels with a nice little descriptor building. :D

Hmm, Earth: Total War! Spanning several centuries and the entire globe! :D Now that would be EPIC (and taxing on one's comp! :p) You know like EEIII without sucking. Oh well I can still dream! :(

Another rason is the impracticalibly of taking an army from Rome, Carthage, Macedonia or any other would-be conquerer of China to its actual destination. RL it would not be possible (unless you were the Mongols or Huns), and the Team has thus, AFAIK, decided that it will not include China as it would be as much fantasy as the Roman Ninjas of Vanilla.

There are several threads here dealing with these subjects. I dunno if you tried the "Search" Function? Thatt is always a good idea to try ;-) but sometimes one has to get the wording just right for the function to find what one is looking for.

And welcome, always good (and amusing) with a new enthusiastic EB-junkie.

on a revelant note... i have just finished reading Arian's "alexandrou Anavasis" and it turns out that Greek knowledge of eastern geography (at the time of Alexander anyway) was pretty distorted. Alexander really believed that crossing the Ganges river and marching some humble distance he would reach the "great ocean" that encircles Asia. Earlier in his campaign when they reached the Caspian Sea they believed they have reached the same "great ocean" that encircled Asia (this time from the north).Obviously they believed that the Scythian nomads inhabited a somehow narrow coastal area of the northern Asian periphery (clearly underestimating the vastness of the central-Asian stepe).When they reached the Hindus river they believed they had actually found the banks of ... Nile!!! (bc both rivers featured crocodiles).What amazed me the most was that the Persians have not corrected the Greeks in their misconceptions (perhaps sharing the same distorted and limited view of geography??? ).

Had Alexander and the Greeks decided to march against the Scythians (past modern-day Afghanistan) or deep past the Ganges river they would be in for some nasty surprises :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amun Nefer

Hmm, Earth: Total War! Spanning several centuries and the entire globe! :D Now that would be EPIC (and taxing on one's comp! :p)

---

That...would...be...awesome!

I think I asked a very similar question in a thread not too long ago, my dream game would probably be an EB like-esc game which covers the whole globe (bar the new world) but it would be extremely historically inaccurate.

Here's the link anyways,

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=120453

Macrille, that assumes I have time to search through thousands of threads :p Besides when I try such things it's usually a thread completely irrelevant to my q. This ain't my first forum after all. :3

Thanks, lol. I've used it for years since .8 I think, but only just registered on this forum.

If Alexander had lived longer he might have gone into China after taking Arabia, Carthage and Italy (although invading would have been a problem given how big their pop already was as well as actually getting into China with a large army through its natural defences of the mountains and deserts.) Alexander thought the River Ocean was beyond the Ganges yeah, but it's suspected the actual reason he turned back was that he was prophesied to conquer Persia sucessfully, but if he went further his fate was uncertain. He did go a bit further, but still he didn't intend to go further. (and didn't really mind since he thought that was the end of the earth anyway.) Don't give me any of that mutiny junk though because he had had many of those and they weren't a real trouble. :p I hate to be a jerk, but he reached the Indus in modern-day Pakistan, not just Afghanistan, then proceeded to sail down the river.

That is true. I mean some of them were able to do wonderful things like almost accurately calculate the size of the planet, but it's weird how they envisioned the world even though they knew about places like China and even traded with them yet they weren't reflected all that well in many maps (sometimes not at all). :/

Meh, Think of it as a simplified version of what the world would have been like in those times except with much more permanent conquest. :3 'Twould be awesome even if it isn't all that accurate... I'm sure that people like the EB team might feel motivated enough to make it accurate. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARCHIPPOS

on a revelant note... i have just finished reading Arian's "alexandrou Anavasis" and it turns out that Greek knowledge of eastern geography (at the time of Alexander anyway) was pretty distorted. Alexander really believed that crossing the Ganges river and marching some humble distance he would reach the "great ocean" that encircles Asia. Earlier in his campaign when they reached the Caspian Sea they believed they have reached the same "great ocean" that encircled Asia (this time from the north).Obviously they believed that the Scythian nomads inhabited a somehow narrow coastal area of the northern Asian periphery (clearly underestimating the vastness of the central-Asian stepe).When they reached the Hindus river they believed they had actually found the banks of ... Nile!!! (bc both rivers featured crocodiles).What amazed me the most was that the Persians have not corrected the Greeks in their misconceptions (perhaps sharing the same distorted and limited view of geography??? ).

Had Alexander and the Greeks decided to march against the Scythians (past modern-day Afghanistan) or deep past the Ganges river they would be in for some nasty surprises :yes:

---

I think it impossible that the Achaemenid nobility would think that the Indus and Nile were the same river.

You have to remember though that at that time the Hellenistic civilization was at the height of what could be described as their philosophical revolution (or evolution maybe). The way that they thought about the world was quite different to how the achaemenids did. They were an ultra conservative society, with all that implies about intellectual curiousity etc. I imagine it unlikely that they would have engaged in many of these proto-scientific/philosophical conversations.

errrrr i think an Indian guy (or was it a Persian???-i'll have to check it up) stepped up and corrected Alexander in the matter of Hindus not being the Nile... however the argument still stands. I also want to point out that Alexander had indeed conceived a masterplan of creating a seatrade route extending from the Indian coasts to Babylon (from the Indian ocean through the Persian gulf and up to Euphrates river). Considering the relatively low costs of sea-trade compared to land-trade (sea trade is approx. 2,5-5 times cheaper) and the amazing wealth that could be amassed (exotic spices,slaves and valuables) and the amazing advantage of completely bypassing the vast northern steppes with its unruly nomads and the harsh terrain of Afghanistan with its hostile mountain-people i was very surprised that the Achaemenids have not already instituted such a route...

Indeed their were many great thinkers during the Hellenistic Era ie. Archimedes of Syracuse and earlier on Euclid.

I never heard of that story before would you happen to have a source for it so I can look it up? :) The thing is that he should've known the difference between the two given the fact that it doesn't make sense logically. I mean they knew about the "Pillars of Hercules" in the West and the "Tin Isles" in the Northwest.

Hmm, you'd think a trade setup like that already existed like you said. I guess that maybe they were busy putting down all the revolts in their empire lol. Then again the setup of their empire was to effectively have each satrap governed as its own little kingdom who basically independent as long as they paid taxes and levied troops needed by the Empire when called upon. If anyone knows about cases of the individual satraps doing this I'd really like to hear about it. :)

Sorry it's early right now. :3

So little survives of the Achaemenid administrative records, that it would be difficult to say from literary records. I don't know of any archaelogical finds relating to this, but I would put good money that they were trading with the rich markets in india. They had a diplomatic relationship with them, I'm pretty sure, and if there is one thing to rely upon its that people will always try and make money.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amun Nefer

Macrille, that assumes I have time to search through thousands of threads :p Besides when I try such things it's usually a thread completely irrelevant to my q. This ain't my first forum after all. :3

Thanks, lol. I've used it for years since .8 I think, but only just registered on this forum.

If Alexander had lived longer he might have gone into China after taking Arabia, Carthage and Italy (although invading would have been a problem given how big their pop already was as well as actually getting into China with a large army through its natural defences of the mountains and deserts.) Alexander thought the River Ocean was beyond the Ganges yeah, but it's suspected the actual reason he turned back was that he was prophesied to conquer Persia sucessfully, but if he went further his fate was uncertain. He did go a bit further, but still he didn't intend to go further. (and didn't really mind since he thought that was the end of the earth anyway.) Don't give me any of that mutiny junk though because he had had many of those and they weren't a real trouble. :p I hate to be a jerk, but he reached the Indus in modern-day Pakistan, not just Afghanistan, then proceeded to sail down the river.

That is true. I mean some of them were able to do wonderful things like almost accurately calculate the size of the planet, but it's weird how they envisioned the world even though they knew about places like China and even traded with them yet they weren't reflected all that well in many maps (sometimes not at all). :/

Meh, Think of it as a simplified version of what the world would have been like in those times except with much more permanent conquest. :3 'Twould be awesome even if it isn't all that accurate... I'm sure that people like the EB team might feel motivated enough to make it accurate. :D

---

Alexander didn't make it very far into India before finding established civilisation. There was a whole subcontinent waiting for him beyond that. And even farther, the jungles of Southeast Asia. China was isolated for so long because there was practically no way to bring a large army within its boundaries.

:tongue2: phewwwww... here is the passage (in Greek). I must admit i roughly remembered the general idea but the details i mentioned are somehow faulted (weak memory :shame:) so here goes...

Arrian, Alexandrou Anavasis, Book 6.1
Ἀλέξανδρος δέ [...] πρότερον μέν γε ἐν τῷ Ἰνδῷ ποταμῷ κροκοδείλους ἰδών, μόνῳ τῶν ἄλλων ποταμῶν πλὴν Νείλου, πρὸς δὲ ταῖς ὄχθαις τοῦ Ἀκεσίνου κυάμους πεφυκότας ὁποίους ἡ γῆ ἐκφέρει ἡ Αἰγυπτία, καὶ {ὁ} ἀκούσας ὅτι ὁ Ἀκεσίνης ἐμβάλλει ἐς τὸν Ἰνδόν, ἔδοξεν ἐξευρηκέναι τοῦ Νείλου τὰς ἀρχάς, ὡς τὸν Νεῖλον ἐνθένδε ποθὲν ἐξ Ἰνδῶν ἀνίσχοντα καὶ δι´ ἐρήμου πολλῆς γῆς ῥέοντα καὶ ταύτῃ ἀπολλύοντα τὸν Ἰνδὸν τὸ ὄνομα, ἔπειτα, ὁπόθεν ἄρχεται διὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης χώρας ῥεῖν, Νεῖλον ἤδη πρὸς Αἰθιόπων τε τῶν ταύτῃ καὶ Αἰγυπτίων καλούμενον ἢ, ὡς Ὅμηρος ἐποίησεν, ἐπώνυμον τῆς Αἰγύπτου Αἴγυπτον, οὕτω δὴ ἐσδιδόναι ἐς τὴν ἐντὸς θάλασσαν. καὶ δὴ καὶ πρὸς Ὀλυμπιάδα γράφοντα ὑπὲρ τῶν Ἰνδῶν τῆς γῆς ἄλλα τε γράψαι καὶ ὅτι δοκοίη αὑτῷ ἐξευρηκέναι τοῦ Νείλου τὰς πηγάς, μικροῖς δή τισι καὶ φαύλοις ὑπὲρ τῶν τηλικούτων τεκμαιρόμενον. ἐπεὶ μέντοι ἀτρεκέστερον ἐξήλεγξε τὰ ἀμφὶ τῷ ποταμῷ τῷ Ἰνδῷ, οὕτω δὴ μαθεῖν παρὰ τῶν ἐπιχωρίων τὸν μὲν Ὑδάσπην τῷ Ἀκεσίνῃ, τὸν Ἀκεσίνην δὲ τῷ Ἰνδῷ τό τε ὕδωρ ξυμβάλλοντας καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι ξυγχωροῦντας, τὸν Ἰνδὸν δὲ ἐκδιδόντα ἤδη ἐς τὴν μεγάλην θάλασσαν, δίστομον τὸν Ἰνδὸν ὄντα, οὐδέν τι αὐτῷ προσῆκον τῆς γῆς τῆς Αἰγυπτίας· τηνικαῦτα δὲ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς τῆς πρὸς τὴν μητέρα τοῦτο τὸ ἀμφὶ τῷ Νείλῳ γραφὲν ἀφελεῖν.

a very rugged translation...
"Alexander... having previously seen that amongst other rivers, crocodiles lived only on Indus with the exception of Nile. And also having observed by the banks of Akesinis (river) broadbeans, which also grow at Egypt. Having heard that Akesinis pours into the Indus he thought of exploring the sources of Nile.He believed that the Nile originates from some place in India, crosses a vast desert wasteland where the river loses its name "Indus" and later reemerges in populated areas.There it is renamed by Aethiopians and Egyptians as "Nile" or as Homer claims "Aegyptos River" like the country the river traverses.Then the river flows into the inner sea (=Medditeranean Sea).When Alexander wrote to his mother Olympiada concerning India , he mentioned among other things that he thought he has found the sources of Nile- reaching a conclusion over such grave matters from such trivial and circumstantial evidence.However when he studied with greater accuracy the known facts concerning Indus, he has learnt from Indian natives that Hydaspis river flows into Akesinis and that Akesinis river flows into Hindus, thus fusing their waters and mixing their names.And also that Indus pours into the Great Ocean and has no relation whatsoever with Egypt.He thus erased from his letters to his mother his assumptions concerning the Nile."

The current map is satisfyingly huge, to the point of being too huge for the AI to handle that well.

Sadly there's no mechanism, in the game for "Your stack of gold chevronned elites decides it wants to go home, or at least back to Babylon", or "You marched into the desert? Nincompoop!" but given the AI's wandering ways its a good thing.

How I long for a system that features supply, attrition, multiple recruitment methods and marries it to CA's attractive battle engine, and an AI that can plot a strategy to meet supply, combat, economic and social agendas.

I guess I'll just have to be satisfied with real world: the one engine that delivers, although all I ever get to do here is read AAR's.

don't forget desertion, plagues, pathfinding, manpower, infrastructire and social stabilty :dizzy2:

Well maybe if a certain Basileus hadn't burned down the palace at Persepolis we wouldn't have that problem. :p Well the clearest indication would be pottery, wares and coins from the different parts of the Empire in India and in India would be the clearest indication.

AVSM I said that though. :p The reason being he probably felt he shouldn't go far beyond the borders of Persia. He probably would have kept going and eventually the Pacific. If Alexander could turn Tyre into a Peninsula and was willing to cross Gedrosia I doubt he would have considered a trip into China to be too big a task.

Oh! That makes a lot of sense actually and would account for the bit of Africa in the map I showed in the OP where Africa and Asia are connected!

Maybe for you, but satisfaction is relevant and a cartophile like me likes huge game maps! :beam: You mean kind of like the one they have in EU III and HoI3? When you have a more realistic set up of course your empires won't grow all that large :p I guess they figure if you make the game too realistic, the level of difficulty would turn people off.

Huh, you talk about Alexander conquering the whole world if he had the time, but one of his last battles was against an Indian king at the Hydaspes river, which he won, but it pretty much all the other indian kings started to unite against the threat of Alex, so they were preparing an army of about 200-300,000 troops with hundreds, perhaps of elephants and chariots. Alex only had 15-20,000 troops, the same phalanx and medium cavalry as always. All the genius and tactics in the world could not have helped him defeat those armies. He could never have conquered all of india, not to mention China, with the piddly little army he had, no matter how experienced each one was. It was good that he turned around when he did, or he would be remembering for meeting a bad end with his army at the end of a very successful campaign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientFanTR

Huh, you talk about Alexander conquering the whole world if he had the time, but one of his last battles was against an Indian king at the Hydaspes river, which he won, but it pretty much all the other indian kings started to unite against the threat of Alex, so they were preparing an army of about 200-300,000 troops with hundreds, perhaps of elephants and chariots. Alex only had 15-20,000 troops, the same phalanx and medium cavalry as always. All the genius and tactics in the world could not have helped him defeat those armies. He could never have conquered all of india, not to mention China, with the piddly little army he had, no matter how experienced each one was. It was good that he turned around when he did, or he would be remembering for meeting a bad end with his army at the end of a very successful campaign.

---

Well... He did conquer the persian empire、which was bigger...:juggle2:

And by the way, if Alexander would have had the time, he would have assembled a huge armies composed of persians, baktrians, egyptians plus his greek and makedon soldiers. The diadochii wars showed the incredible manpower of his empire.

i think his major problems would involve suply lines and climate changes, not tactical challanges. throughout his cmpaign that dude showed remarcable creativity and adaptation as far as battlefield tactics went. few other generals in antiquity as well as later history showed such battlefield instincts and iniciative. however on a strategic level we got somewhat lucky wit hthe persians. i mean they were virtualy ripe for the taking, which i doubt could be said for India or china. i feel maybe he could campaign and possibly take northen parts of the Indian subcontinent and still maintain political unision and social stability, but not much further east or south. western mediteranean would be logisticaly more realistic goal :yes:

Both India and China were completely disunited at the time so his chances might have been good in that respect, Chandragupta Maurya is recorded as saying the Alexander narrowly missed making himself the master of India due to the unpopularness of the Nanda rulers.
Of the two India was the only region he could have conceivably conquered after raising fresh armies, China was too far away and he would have to pass through the territiories of varoius powerful steppe tribes to get there and defend what would be extremely streched supply lines from said tribes as well not to mention having to then fight the Chinese states when he got there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARCHIPPOS

errrrr i think an Indian guy (or was it a Persian???-i'll have to check it up) stepped up and corrected Alexander in the matter of Hindus not being the Nile... however the argument still stands. I also want to point out that Alexander had indeed conceived a masterplan of creating a seatrade route extending from the Indian coasts to Babylon (from the Indian ocean through the Persian gulf and up to Euphrates river). Considering the relatively low costs of sea-trade compared to land-trade (sea trade is approx. 2,5-5 times cheaper) and the amazing wealth that could be amassed (exotic spices,slaves and valuables) and the amazing advantage of completely bypassing the vast northern steppes with its unruly nomads and the harsh terrain of Afghanistan with its hostile mountain-people i was very surprised that the Achaemenids have not already instituted such a route...

---

Sailing at this time was done using, uh, sails, which meant you were dependant on the wind direction/speed. Because it changed in India so regularly and stayed in the same direction for such long period of time because of the monsoon, it took several years to sail to the Eastern coast of India and back again. And getting through the Straits of Malacca would have been even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

China was too far away and he would have to pass through the territiories of varoius powerful steppe tribes to get there and defend what would be extremely streched supply lines from said tribes as well not to mention having to then fight the Chinese states when he got there.

---

Thankfully with Asia ton Barbaroron, we shall prove that such petty things are useless, and shall have Phalanxes marching down the Yangtze in no time.

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

---

Second this, it will go to roughly the beginnin of Singapore and just a bit of China, which is part of the Eremos.

Many be one day when we play EB III on Empire without testudo, phalanx or siege battles.... :shame:
At the moment empire is far beyond to make a roman mod with it.....

1.3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atraphoenix

Many be one day when we play EB III on Empire without testudo, phalanx or siege battles.... :shame:
At the moment empire is far beyond to make a roman mod with it.....

---

Here's hoping they make a R2TW game sometime in the future with awesome graphics and actually improve gameplay rather than diminish it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientFanTR

Here's hoping they make a R2TW game sometime in the future with awesome graphics and actually improve gameplay rather than diminish it!

---

well, arguably Empire total war was a step in the right direction AI wise. but in everything else, I find it to be a half-dozen steps backward. its, for starters, WAY too beefy, gameplay somewhat overdrawn, and sieges on walled and entrnched cities are noticeably absent. the reason the last annoys me is because sieges were an Important element of eighteenth century warfare.

and honestly, we live in the year 2010: you'd figure the people making these games would figure out how to cut size without sacrificing "eye" candy. I know that there is/was a reformatt possible for .cas files in RTW that drastically cuts the size of the cas files (i think the new formatt is called a rum file-I could be mistaken)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

Err you do know Asia ton Barbaron doesn't go that far east?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

Second this, it will go to roughly the beginnin of Singapore and just a bit of China, which is part of the Eremos.

---

Aww.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

1.3

---

Yayyyyy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

I'm pretty sure, and if there is one thing to rely upon its that people will always try and make money.

Foot

---

something about this makes me grin in a cheeky manner.... =D

Personally I understand that there is a hardcoded limit to provinces, however, I do feel that there is a (likely unintended) baises to the west and mid east provinces. The farther you go out the larger the provinces get. I would prefer to see an even larger map so that this discrepency can be changed.

As evidence to this point I would direct your attention to the fact that in the west many armies can travel to multiple cities in one turn, while the farther east you go, this ability decreases. You can point out the the eastern armies are heavily reliant on cavalry but that still doesnt make up for the sheer physical differences in the province sizes.


When I say east I mean like the far far east and far north

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paramedicguyer

Personally I understand that there is a hardcoded limit to provinces, however, I do feel that there is a (likely unintended) baises to the west and mid east provinces. The farther you go out the larger the provinces get. I would prefer to see an even larger map so that this discrepency can be changed.

As evidence to this point I would direct your attention to the fact that in the west many armies can travel to multiple cities in one turn, while the farther east you go, this ability decreases. You can point out the the eastern armies are heavily reliant on cavalry but that still doesnt make up for the sheer physical differences in the province sizes.


When I say east I mean like the far far east and far north

---

with that name i will assume you have seen the image of the man painted base not on his looks but on his sensibility with enormous hands and extremly large lips wich for most people would make them consider that man a freak except for the explination on sensitivity where your human body is more sensitive

http://www.parismarashi.com/ppm/wp-c...homunculus.jpg

i believe we can draw an analogy beteween the previous example and eb, western europe expecially the mediterranean is the most sensitive area and therefore gets more "surface" then the regions where we know less about or isn´t so appealing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paramedicguyer

Personally I understand that there is a hardcoded limit to provinces, however, I do feel that there is a (likely unintended) baises to the west and mid east provinces. The farther you go out the larger the provinces get. I would prefer to see an even larger map so that this discrepency can be changed.

As evidence to this point I would direct your attention to the fact that in the west many armies can travel to multiple cities in one turn, while the farther east you go, this ability decreases. You can point out the the eastern armies are heavily reliant on cavalry but that still doesnt make up for the sheer physical differences in the province sizes.


When I say east I mean like the far far east and far north

---

Or maybe it is just because Europe and the Mid-East were far more densely populated?

I don't get why people want China. Its not like China cares about the rest of the world. It is the center of the world and wouldn't care about some dumb crap happening on a far away peninsula. It'd just sit at home and talk about how awesome it was and make all its immediate neighbors acknowledge how awesome it was. And then it would steal their lunch money to build walls to keep them out so it could bask in its own awesomeness and taunt all the non-awesome people from the tops of its awesome walls.

That and the fact that there is a huge high altitude desert where its extremely cold and hot sometimes at the same time due to the amount of radiant energy from the sun and the cold air temperature that you would have to cross. That or frigid steppe or the world's tallest mountains, or another giant desert if you actually wanted to get there.

On a totally less random note. Does anyone know if any celts ever wandered to China? I mean, they were absolutely everywhere.

I have no idea why im getting hammered here. I am not in favor of expanding the map, only making western europe and the middle east bigger. This is a massive problem with this forum, people are always ragging on each other, it really stifles conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

On a totally less random note. Does anyone know if any celts ever wandered to China? I mean, they were absolutely everywhere.

---

I think I read an article not too long ago about the possible discovery of celts in China. IIRC, the guys weren't 100% sure, but thought they had discovered a celtic burial site in north-west China.

Here's an article : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...es-413638.html

I've heard of those but always throught those weren't Celtic. That's pretty neat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

I think I read an article not too long ago about the possible discovery of celts in China. IIRC, the guys weren't 100% sure, but thought they had discovered a celtic burial site in north-west China.

Here's an article : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...es-413638.html

---

While very interesting the writer of that article is making some astoundingly ridiculous assumptions/connections, they're talking about the Tarim mummies who are from European looking peoples who lived in the region and have been linked to the speakers of the Tocharian languages such as the Yuezhi/Kushans (possibly).
Calling these remains "Celtic" is completely false, the writer seems to assume that anything European looking is infact "Celtic" and then goes on to say that these eastern "Celts" spoke Tocharian which is like saying Italians are infact Indians because both their languages share a common source.
I don't think I have ever seen such a extreme example of twisting the facts of a story in my entire life:whip:

On another note concerning the possiblity of actual Celts in the region I do reacall reading somewhere about Celtic mercenaries being used by Baktria so its possible one or two could have travelled onwards.

Wasn't there that story about some Romans captured at Carrhae ending up somewhere in China?

That's one of the articles talking about that. It's not the one I read at first, but I couldn't find it anyway, so I linked this one, since it's from a somewhat known newspaper. I'm sure people from EB could comment on that for some more time.

Yeah its from the Independent which is one of the major newspapers here in the UK, its quite surprising such an article made it in as I always though they were quite good, the writer has got things so wrong it makes me worry about the accuracy of reports on topics I'm less knowledgable about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

Wasn't there that story about some Romans captured at Carrhae ending up somewhere in China?

---

I heard that one too, supposedly something about a Chinese chronicle mentioning some captured foreign soldiers that fought in "fish scale formation" which is beleived by some to be a reference to the roman testudo.

from what i read those soldiers where building damms and roads and finally ended up defending the northern border of the parthian empire against the steppe people nothing mentioned about them going to the east

as for the tarrim basin mummies latest dna studies have proven that they had a very big mix of blood including steppe chinese and indian blood into them but the culture was almost centainly european if we conclude they used tartan cloth

I dunno bobbin, my experience with major UK publications is they fairly good most of the time but they get crazy overzealous every so often...

@Roman Prisoners - Its very very speculative as there are many different interpretations of this one line with the 'Roman Prisoner' one the most exciting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paramedicguyer

I have no idea why im getting hammered here. I am not in favor of expanding the map, only making western europe and the middle east bigger. This is a massive problem with this forum, people are always ragging on each other, it really stifles conversation.

---

I don't think ASM's comment was directed at you, but I'd like to know the answer as well. For the steppe provinces the answer is obvious, but for the eastern ones less so. It certainly is not a function of population, as India has only three towns. Perhaps the far east was more centralized, so that the capture of one major town would have a far greater effect on politics? Or is it simply because they are further away from the hub of EB's Empires?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Its not like China cares about the rest of the world. It is the center of the world and wouldn't care about some dumb crap happening on a far away peninsula. It'd just sit at home and talk about how awesome it was and make all its immediate neighbors acknowledge how awesome it was. And then it would steal their lunch money to build walls to keep them out so it could bask in its own awesomeness and taunt all the non-awesome people from the tops of its awesome walls.

---

That sounds rather like Terry Jones' description of the Roman Empire. The major difference being that the Romans didn't build as many or as effective walls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

On a totally less random note. Does anyone know if any celts ever wandered to China? I mean, they were absolutely everywhere.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

Wasn't there that story about some Romans captured at Carrhae ending up somewhere in China?

---

There are a couple of old posts by MeinPanzer debunking the story of the Celtic mummies and questioning that of the Romans in Bactria.

If I was to lead the next project on Total War, I would make it global scale, allow the player to choose his/her time period, and the map would be global, 3-Dimensional, and allow circumnavigation (e.g. sailing from America to Asia in short direction, not the long way). Scalable campaign map. Making use of DX11, very taxing on the systems of today. It'd be something I'd expect to come out later in this decade requiring also better screens, larger if you want anything fun. HD nonetheless!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

I don't get why people want China. Its not like China cares about the rest of the world. It is the center of the world and wouldn't care about some dumb crap happening on a far away peninsula. It'd just sit at home and talk about how awesome it was and make all its immediate neighbors acknowledge how awesome it was. And then it would steal their lunch money to build walls to keep them out so it could bask in its own awesomeness and taunt all the non-awesome people from the tops of its awesome walls.

That and the fact that there is a huge high altitude desert where its extremely cold and hot sometimes at the same time due to the amount of radiant energy from the sun and the cold air temperature that you would have to cross. That or frigid steppe or the world's tallest mountains, or another giant desert if you actually wanted to get there.

On a totally less random note. Does anyone know if any celts ever wandered to China? I mean, they were absolutely everywhere.

---

Your comments might be right concerning late Chinese dynasties such as Song or Ming, but in EB era the reverse is true. In fact I suspect that in the last century before Christ the Han Dynasty has substantial military existence in the map of EB1, as they chased and hunted Hsiung-Nu all the way into the area of Talas river, if it is included in EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

I don't get why people want China.

---

Try and tell me that Phalanxes/Legions/Cataphracts/Gaesatae rampaging down the Yangtze isn't awesome, and believe it. Go on, I dare you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Its not like China cares about the rest of the world. It is the center of the world and wouldn't care about some dumb crap happening on a far away peninsula. It'd just sit at home and talk about how awesome it was and make all its immediate neighbors acknowledge how awesome it was. And then it would steal their lunch money to build walls to keep them out so it could bask in its own awesomeness and taunt all the non-awesome people from the tops of its awesome walls.

---

So? Rome and the various Hellenic Empires behaved the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

That and the fact that there is a huge high altitude desert where its extremely cold and hot sometimes at the same time due to the amount of radiant energy from the sun and the cold air temperature that you would have to cross. That or frigid steppe or the world's tallest mountains, or another giant desert if you actually wanted to get there.

---

This is the biggest actual problem. The plausibility is about in the nigh-impossible range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

If I was to lead the next project on Total War, I would make it global scale, allow the player to choose his/her time period, and the map would be global, 3-Dimensional, and allow circumnavigation (e.g. sailing from America to Asia in short direction, not the long way). Scalable campaign map. Making use of DX11, very taxing on the systems of today. It'd be something I'd expect to come out later in this decade requiring also better screens, larger if you want anything fun. HD nonetheless!

---

It already exists. It's called "Any-game" by Paradox Interactive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paramedicguyer

Personally I understand that there is a hardcoded limit to provinces, however, I do feel that there is a (likely unintended) baises to the west and mid east provinces. The farther you go out the larger the provinces get. I would prefer to see an even larger map so that this discrepency can be changed.

---

Europa Universalis and Europa Barbarorum combo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

It already exists. It's called "Any-game" by Paradox Interactive.

---

I just checked that out. There are no battles.

You didn't mention that in your description of the perfect game. And it does have battle, but they're represented more abstractly than in TW Games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

And it does have battle, but they're represented more abstractly than in TW Games.

---

I think "abstractly" is a deceptive description of Paradox Games' battles. :beam: At least from my experience with Crusader Kings and EU: Rome, which are the only ones I've played. Battles are completely hands-off and have no graphical representation other than numbers floating around. I think it's safe to say that Total War games' main draw is the fact that they offer the most involved and realistic battle simulations available, without completely sacrificing more grand-scale strategy elements (i.e., the campaign map). CK and EUR don't really provide better alternatives for TW gamers looking for more in-depth historical strategy experiences; you're just trading tactical depth for strategic depth (and good graphics for decent ones :yes:). It's a different kind of experience.

Having said that, I really don't have any desire to see the campaign map get any bigger. I'm more in favor of shrinking it. I think stretching as far south as it currently does, to fit the entire Arabian Peninsula on the map, is a waste of resources. I think an overall more enjoyable game would be had without all that empty space, even if it meant sacrificing Saba. But I'm hardly going to argue for such a change at this point in development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B_Ray

Having said that, I really don't have any desire to see the campaign map get any bigger. I'm more in favor of shrinking it. I think stretching as far south as it currently does, to fit the entire Arabian Peninsula on the map, is a waste of resources. I think an overall more enjoyable game would be had without all that empty space, even if it meant sacrificing Saba. But I'm hardly going to argue for such a change at this point in development.

---

:furious3::furious3::furious3:

~;)

We've had this discussion like two hundred times here and over at the Total War Center. The team have always stated that Arabia and the Sabaean faction will remain. Some people would stop arguing by now. But why give up, when it is so nice to pester them with requests like "cut out teh Saba, they sucks" or "why is there no LS?!111", "can we has four Roman factions?", or "make Britain one province and scrap Casse/Germans/Romani/whatever"...

:inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

Try and tell me that Phalanxes/Legions/Cataphracts/Gaesatae rampaging down the Yangtze isn't awesome, and believe it. Go on, I dare you.

---

Yes it would be a pretty epic reward to run down the Yangtze naked if you spent 10EB years wandering through all that empty inhospitable terrain. Except then the Qin era military machine would have sucked to have run into...

It would make more sense to add in the Sahel and a rich Proto-Niger civilization than China.

@paramedicguyer: Didn't see your post up there for the longest time. I was responding more to the OP than anything else if you still care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Yes it would be a pretty epic reward to run down the Yangtze naked if you spent 10EB years wandering through all that empty inhospitable terrain. Except then the Qin era military machine would have sucked to have run into...

---

That's why it would be fun. The Makedons probably thought that the Achaemenid's military machine would have sucked to have run into.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

YIt would make more sense to add in the Sahel and a rich Proto-Niger civilization than China.

---

Although, thinking ahead into the far far future, perhaps the trading zones in E:TW could be utilised for a similar-ish purpose, or for China?
(I know I'm being implausible, but I don't care :D)

except for adequate AI and naval battles (oh how i love them naval battles) i don't think the ETW engine gives much hope for a new EB :no:

The main problem with modding E:TW is that you can't. No modding tools have been released, so very little of the game is actually moddable. Never mind that the A.I. and engine presumably aren't optimized for melee battles.

So I'm being very implausible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

The main problem with modding E:TW is that you can't. No modding tools have been released, so very little of the game is actually moddable. Never mind that the A.I. and engine presumably aren't optimized for melee battles.

---

Eh, it gives you MTW moshpit type melee battles and the AI can do it well enough for whatever reason but really ETW =/= a good engine for EB.

It would only work well for Renaissance/Samurais/Rifle-Pike-Musket-Era/WWI and stuff like that...

I wanna make a WWI mod.

I think WW1 would be impossible to portray in a TW game correctly, infact anything after the Crimean war or American Civil war just wouldn't work.

Yeah, aircraft, artillery, entrenchment...

How about a Star Wars mod? :laugh4:

My thoughts: Steam Punk Archimedes. 'nuff said.